Subject: Re: Adding more evidence
From: Pavel Shumilov (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Jan 25 2000 - 09:59:33 MET
Good afternoon, gentlemen.
As I see, Kami ROUSSEAU roused a big dispute on a watermelon's fate, but I
think there are still some misunderstandings.
I'll try to show the doubts that Kami's director may have. I am sorry
beforehand, if my thoughts will look too naive to the "monsters of fuzzy"
What our poor watermelon needs, and what Kami's director wants, is only to
judge - is an object a watermelon, or not?
Of course, fuzzy logic works well where we need a fuzzy output (before
actuators, e.g. "increase a little", and so on).
In the case with our watermelon fuzzy logic should gives only one of two
possible crisp output values ("yes" or "no"), and not an intermediate value
between them. If we got the membership value of "the object is a watermelon"
0.6, could it help us?
If the problem was to choose a "ripe watermelon" instead of just a
watermelon, fuzzy logic seems to perform better.
So I think that Kami's director is doubtful in ability of fuzzy logic to
deal effectively with such sort of problems, where it have to choose only
between two ways - say, the problems like "to be, or not to be."
This message was posted through the fuzzy mailing list.
(1) To subscribe to this mailing list, send a message body of
"SUB FUZZY-MAIL myFirstName mySurname" to email@example.com
(2) To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send a message body of
"UNSUB FUZZY-MAIL" or "UNSUB FUZZY-MAIL firstname.lastname@example.org"
(3) To reach the human who maintains the list, send mail to
(4) WWW access and other information on Fuzzy Sets and Logic see
(5) WWW archive: http://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/marchives/fuzzy-mail/index.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Thu Apr 06 2000 - 15:59:40 MET DST